Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 LethalShade wrote:
"Political will"

Dude, stop the nonsense, you're talking about the French government

Yes, but will they go on strike or will they surrender?

(sorry, mean joke. I hope France is going to go Mali on ISIS's ass. France is probably the most capable and willing European power now that the Germans all became pacifists. )



The best solution I see is to send in Western, Russian and Iranian soldiers to pacify the region, then support Assad and Iran to keep cracking down hard on dissent after we leave again. Supporting the anti-Assad movements was one of the most stupid things the West could do. Assad's opressive regime was keeping things quiet and prosperous, and if there had been no international support for the rebels, they might have been quickly stamped out just like previous anti-Assad revolts. The next thing to do before we leave is to nuke the Saudi leadership. I am certain it is mostly thanks to them that radical islamist movements (conveniently being of the exact same Islamic sect as the Saudis) popped up everywhere. Sure, that means supporting Iran, and Iran is not nice either, but at least Iran does not pull gak like that, and it is more moderate in its islamic ideology. I have never been able to understand why the West chose to support the most hardcore islamist regime of the region.
With a strong and well-supported leader in Syria keeping the peace, and the primary source and support for radical islamism taken out, there might be a chance of relative peace. After that, there is needed a lot of work to heal the sunni/shia divide again.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 LethalShade wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Does the French still have the Legion? Sounds like a job opportunity.

You mean the Foreign Legion ? Yep, we still have them.

Time for the slow march. I have this image of Legion troops being transported on Russian transport planes, while Iran flies cover....

You do realize they are not like the Roman Legion, right?
I mean, the name is really cool, but they aren't the main army.

They don't need the main army.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 LethalShade wrote:
"Political will"

Dude, stop the nonsense, you're talking about the French government

Yes, but will they go on strike or will they surrender?

(sorry, mean joke. I hope France is going to go Mali on ISIS's ass. France is probably the most capable and willing European power now that the Germans all became pacifists. )



The best solution I see is to send in Western, Russian and Iranian soldiers to pacify the region, then support Assad and Iran to keep cracking down hard on dissent after we leave again. Supporting the anti-Assad movements was one of the most stupid things the West could do. Assad's opressive regime was keeping things quiet and prosperous, and if there had been no international support for the rebels, they might have been quickly stamped out just like previous anti-Assad revolts. The next thing to do before we leave is to nuke the Saudi leadership. I am certain it is mostly thanks to them that radical islamist movements (conveniently being of the exact same Islamic sect as the Saudis) popped up everywhere. Sure, that means supporting Iran, and Iran is not nice either, but at least Iran does not pull gak like that, and it is more moderate in its islamic ideology. I have never been able to understand why the West chose to support the most hardcore islamist regime of the region.
With a strong and well-supported leader in Syria keeping the peace, and the primary source and support for radical islamism taken out, there might be a chance of relative peace. After that, there is needed a lot of work to heal the sunni/shia divide again.

As long as by Western you don't mean US. We're done.

I think at the end of the day you'll have an "Assad" regime in Syria, but not necessarily the guy himself. I'm thinking a brokered agreement in West and then retaking the East by Sorm. thats the current Assad/Iran/Russian plan now.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 LethalShade wrote:
"Political will"

Dude, stop the nonsense, you're talking about the French government

Yes, but will they go on strike or will they surrender?

(sorry, mean joke. I hope France is going to go Mali on ISIS's ass. France is probably the most capable and willing European power now that the Germans all became pacifists. )

Tactical surrendering, my friend. New meta.
(I'm used to this kind of jokes )

Hollande is giving a great speech at Versailles atm. He's asking American and Russian forces to join France's (and Europe's) to kick ISIS's ass.


Frazzled : The US can't let us down. Not now.

 LethalShade wrote:

Frazzled : The US can't let us down. Not now.

I don't think the US will go as far as "putting boots" on the ground in any meaningful scale.

But, logistical and airpower support?

I'm game. Let's go!

 Frazzled wrote:
Does the French still have the Legion? Sounds like a job opportunity.

Still there, still badass.

The speech ended. The whole congress started singing La Marseillaise. Never thought Versailles got such good acoustics.


TF;DL (Too French; Didn't Listen) : We're going Mali on ISIS's ass, the constitution will be modified.

 LethalShade wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 LethalShade wrote:
"Political will"

Dude, stop the nonsense, you're talking about the French government

Yes, but will they go on strike or will they surrender?

(sorry, mean joke. I hope France is going to go Mali on ISIS's ass. France is probably the most capable and willing European power now that the Germans all became pacifists. )

Tactical surrendering, my friend. New meta.
(I'm used to this kind of jokes )

Hollande is giving a great speech at Versailles atm. He's asking American and Russian forces to join France's (and Europe's) to kick ISIS's ass.


Frazzled : The US can't let us down. Not now.

Retreating is another way of charging into a future battle

Never have I've seen anything this creep written by a cartoonist


Clearly this man fully supports ISIS and is joyful to see Paris attacked due to his personal political alignment (Pro-NCPO Junta. the organization which the E.U. denounces--this made him an enemy to the E.U. as well).

While I came from the same country as him. I am perfectly against him politically.

 LethalShade wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 LethalShade wrote:
"Political will"

Dude, stop the nonsense, you're talking about the French government

Yes, but will they go on strike or will they surrender?

(sorry, mean joke. I hope France is going to go Mali on ISIS's ass. France is probably the most capable and willing European power now that the Germans all became pacifists. )

Tactical surrendering, my friend. New meta.
(I'm used to this kind of jokes )

Hollande is giving a great speech at Versailles atm. He's asking American and Russian forces to join France's (and Europe's) to kick ISIS's ass.

Frazzled : The US can't let us down. Not now.

And sadly, for the very first time in our nation's history, Canada will turn it's back on an ally under enemy aggression.

I'm so ashamed of my country right now... We've got a leader who's first & most important interest is taking ****ing selfies.

I have been saying this for years now; the Middle East won't calm down until the rest of the world stops caring. Without foreign resources going into the region the conflict is unsustainable. In the end, its the people of the region that have to take it upon themselves to build a better future, or it will never happen. I think it will happen eventually, simply because there is a finite amount of oil.

https://www.rt.com/news/322305-isis-financed-40-countries/

Putin's just done a speech at the G20 in which he states that ISIS is financed by 40 countries, among which are G20 countries. He apparently has satellite pictures to back it up as well.

Nothing new, really (Saudi Arabia, anyone?), but it's a good thing that someone in as high a position as this says so, rather than just ignoring or denying it.

Is this French response to wiping out ISIS going to be the same as that spouted by the King of Jordan?

^ This french 'war declarations' (first time in some 60 years) means that Hollande is SERIOUS. ISIS has been stinging France for some time and that's enough reasons to declare war (and this time this is Full Scale Invasion in a very classic way). Not just aerial support. Syria will be invaded. and Bashar Al Assard will now be at mercy of vengeful French troops. (Unless he negotiated a deal with France that will keep him in power for a few more years UNDER severe conditions that he must initiate democratic transitions no matter what)

 Lone Cat wrote:
^ This french 'war declarations' (first time in some 60 years) means that Hollande is SERIOUS. ISIS has been stinging France for some time and that's enough reasons to declare war (and this time this is Full Scale Invasion in a very classic way). Not just aerial support. Syria will be invaded. and Bashar Al Assard will now be at mercy of vengeful French troops. (Unless he negotiated a deal with France that will keep him in power for a few more years UNDER severe conditions that he must initiate democratic transitions no matter what)

Wait, what?? ISIS attacks France, so France attacks Assad?

Did Bashar Assad take over the leadership of ISIS recently?

A lot of Jihadis came from Assad's prisons.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Lone Cat wrote:
^ This french 'war declarations' (first time in some 60 years) means that Hollande is SERIOUS. ISIS has been stinging France for some time and that's enough reasons to declare war (and this time this is Full Scale Invasion in a very classic way). Not just aerial support. Syria will be invaded. and Bashar Al Assard will now be at mercy of vengeful French troops. (Unless he negotiated a deal with France that will keep him in power for a few more years UNDER severe conditions that he must initiate democratic transitions no matter what)

Wait, what?? ISIS attacks France, so France attacks Assad?

Did Bashar Assad take over the leadership of ISIS recently?

Nah! I'm saying that France will enter Syria. This is the war against ISIS but why I quote Al Assard involvement here? I know that Assard DOES NOT lead ISIS, but much of his goons treat the ISIS as their ally. (even if Assard himself doesn't like the ISIS and what them gone, he too had enough problems with other rebellions aimed to oust him. If he has no choice he might need ISIS to help.... but AFAIK Iran Forces decided to help Assard fight the ISIS and some Iranian troops were sent there, this aimed to prevent Western powers one more foothold in the Middle East)
What will Assard do if full scale French invasion happens in Syria? What will be his reaction?
And what will F. Hollande do with Al Assard?

I don't think Al Assard will be ignored.

Assad has been fighting ISIS ever since they set a foot in Syria.

Should France send ground forces to Syria, they'll ignore Assad because otherwise they'll get in trouble with both Iran and Russia.

 thenoobbomb wrote:
Assad has been fighting ISIS ever since they set a foot in Syria.

Should France send ground forces to Syria, they'll ignore Assad because otherwise they'll get in trouble with both Iran and Russia.

OK. ISIS wants Assad dead so they will integrate what he left with the new Grand Islamic State. and Assad fought them. but don't forget that Assad has so many enemies and some of his goons are considerably corrupt, so his goons might consider working with ISIS a good option to save the regime (or them?).

Even so I don't think that Assad's ally will leave French Expedition Forces alone. Putin and Hollande will meet someday to discuss this Syrian campaign and... of possible, avoid unneccessary conflict. But surely Assad and his allies will be displeased if French troops set foot on Syria and he won't standstill.

The last thing we need is to provoke a conflict with Russia by attacking Russia's military ally in a region where Russian forces are active. To attack Assad now would be fething idiotic.

Russia already has a reputation for playing chicken with its bombers, sending them into British (and other European nations') airspace. How do you think Putin will react if we overtly try to remove his ally and puppet from power with direct military action? He already knows we've been supporting rebel groups, trying to undermine Assad.

Something that's really been irritating me is the idea that "ISIS is not Muslim".

How is this even remotely true? I don't argue the Inquisition or the WBC isn't Christian or some equally ridiculous point.

Hell, ISIS is arguably more Muslim than other Muslims.

ISIS's actions do not accurately represent what most Muslims believe in*

 LethalShade wrote:
ISIS's actions do not accurately represent what most Muslims believe in*

Highly likely to be true, but the Pew Research Centre study suggests that a significant portion certainly have beliefs along the lines of ISIS': http://www.pewforum.org/files/2013/04/worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-full-report.pdf

Again, they call themselves Muslim and they literally religiously follow the Qu'ran, so how can people claim they're not Muslim?

I suppose the Crusaders weren't true Christians either.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
I suppose the Crusaders weren't true Christians either.

I'm just saying, technically, the Normans were Vikings

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
I suppose the Crusaders weren't true Christians either.

You're not a true wargamer.

I don't think anybody is actually claiming that they aren't Muslim. They don't represent Islam, but they are still Muslim.

 nullBolt wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
I suppose the Crusaders weren't true Christians either.

You're not a true wargamer.

500+ unpainted miniatures says otherwise.

Now that is the mark of a true enthusiast. You even have more than me!

 Lone Cat wrote:
^ This french 'war declarations' (first time in some 60 years) means that Hollande is SERIOUS. ISIS has been stinging France for some time and that's enough reasons to declare war (and this time this is Full Scale Invasion in a very classic way). Not just aerial support. Syria will be invaded. and Bashar Al Assard will now be at mercy of vengeful French troops. (Unless he negotiated a deal with France that will keep him in power for a few more years UNDER severe conditions that he must initiate democratic transitions no matter what)

Or he agrees to buy lots of French weapon systems etc - thats normally how we Western countries liberate.

 nullBolt wrote:

 LethalShade wrote:
ISIS's actions do not accurately represent what most Muslims believe in*

Highly likely to be true, but the Pew Research Centre study suggests that a significant portion certainly have beliefs along the lines of ISIS': http://www.pewforum.org/files/2013/04/worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-full-report.pdf

Again, they call themselves Muslim and they literally religiously follow the Qu'ran, so how can people claim they're not Muslim?

By the same methods that reasonable people do not believe that the KKK or the Westboro Baptist Church accurately reflect the beliefs of most Christians.

And I say this as someone who believes in God, but does not believe in God in the same way that most people do. There are many who say I would be better off claiming to be an agnostic or an atheist... but I very firmly believe in the existence of God, and I also, just as firmly, believe He is a murderous psychopath.